Pudgy

As I mentioned, you can continue to deny it, but that doesn't change the fact that you have used it in the past. Therefore, your defense of 587 BC is meaningless or otherwise incorrect by COJ's understanding of Chronology. Scripture warns us to stay vigilant and be alert for the coming of the Son of God, as he will arrive unexpectedly, like a thief in the night.
Your dissenting ideas do not align with Christianity as you compel others to believe in your own misguided convictions. What makes it unacceptable to God is not your disbelief in chronology, but rather your action and speaking against the word of God by making it public.

Velikovski’s book “Worlds in Collision” came out about 1950. I read it in the 7th grade. Even at that young age I knew it was total crap.  
…. the cover illustration and title suckered me in.

"The manna was synthesized out of the residue of the comet's  elements left in the earth's atmosphere" 😀

yikes!

I didn't expect the 1950 Awake! article to be as supportive as it was. The entire article gives him the benefit of the doubt, right up to finally including a statement that it includes speculation and unproven ideas. Here is the first part, and I have included the conclusion above.  

 

Velikovski’s book “Worlds in Collision” came out about 1950. I read it in the 7th grade. Even at that young age I knew it was total crap.  
…. the cover illustration and title suckered me in.

Yeah, you probably are still cowering in the basement from Orson Wells reading War of the Worlds.
Lions and tigers and Martians—oh my.

But you seem to forget that NO ONE relies on VAT 4956 as authoritative evidence. It's just one part of a puzzle made up of at least 50,000 pieces of evidence. And all 50,000 pieces just happen to consistently fit with all the other pieces of evidence. And all 50,000 pieces mitigate against the WTS publications' timeline of Nebuchadezzar and the other 5 Neo-Babylonian kings. It's the sum total of several completely independent lines of evidence --at least a dozen independent lines, where the 50,000 business tablets is counted as only one of those lines of evidence. It's not about any ONE piece of evidence for the Neo-Babylonian timeline.
But most people would think it's akin to a game of foolishness to think of Dr. Immanuel Velikovsky as providing authoritative evidence, as you have referenced him above. I have the book "Worlds in Collision" on the shelf behind me and I have skimmed it. You can verify in the May 8, 1950 Awake!, page 27,28, that his ideas were wildly speculative and completely unsupported by evidence. 
*** dx30-85 Worlds in Collision ***
WORLDS IN COLLISION
book by Dr. Immanuel Velikovsky: g50 5/8 27-28
[moved to the end of the post]
That article was overly generous to him because he tried to support Biblical miraculous events with cosmic events in our solar system. Wikipedia gives a good summary of his ideas, some of which were published in "Worlds in Collision" some in "Ramses II and His Time," etc.
The causes of these natural catastrophes were close encounters between the Earth and other bodies within the Solar System — not least what are now the planets Saturn, Jupiter, Venus, and Mars, these bodies having moved upon different orbits within human memory. To explain the fact that these changes to the configuration of the Solar System violate several well-understood laws of physics, Velikovsky invented a role for electromagnetic forces in counteracting gravity and orbital mechanics. Some of Velikovsky's specific postulated catastrophes included:[citation needed]
A tentative suggestion that Earth had once been a satellite of a "proto-Saturn" body, before its current solar orbit. That the Deluge (Noah's Flood) had been caused by proto-Saturn's entering a nova state, and ejecting much of its mass into space. A suggestion that the planet Mercury was involved in the Tower of Babel catastrophe. Jupiter had been the prime mover in the catastrophe that saw the destruction of Sodom and Gomorrah. Periodic close contacts with a "cometary Venus" (which had been ejected from Jupiter) had caused the Exodus events (c. 1500 BCE) and Joshua's subsequent "sun standing still" (Joshua 10:12–13) incident. Periodic close contacts with Mars had caused havoc in the 8th and 7th centuries BCE.

Imagine, then, that approved association with Jehovah's people MUST include acceptance of a mix of secular chronology and "Bible" chronology!!
*** w86 4/1 p. 31 Questions From Readers ***
Approved association with Jehovah’s Witnesses requires accepting the entire range of the true teachings of the Bible, including those Scriptural beliefs that are unique to Jehovah’s Witnesses. What do such beliefs include?
. . .That 1914 marked the end of the Gentile Times and the establishment of the Kingdom of God in the heavens, as well as the time for Christ’s foretold presence.

*** w83 1/1 p. 12 par. 5 The Kingdom Issue to the Fore! ***
Properly, then, the ending of the Gentile Times in the latter half of 1914 still stands on a historical basis as one of the fundamental Kingdom truths to which we must hold today.
 
Rather than:
(2 Timothy 3:15-17) . . .. All Scripture is inspired of God and beneficial for teaching, for reproving, for setting things straight, for disciplining in righteousness, so that the man of God may be fully competent, completely equipped for every good work.

Exactly on each point!!!
Now imagine Jehovah telling a "faitfhul slave" or pre-cursor of that "faithful slave" that the only way Jesus is going to distinguish between the 5 wise virgins and the 5 foolish virgins (in our time period) is based on their acceptance of a specific mix of secular chronology and "Bible" chronology.
And it's a chronology that started out as:
Oh look how great Ptolemy is; all astronomers agree that his dates are perfectly well-established! Which soon turned into:
Look how terrible Ptolemy is; his chronology is suspect because he gives different dates than the ones we need prior to 539. Let's go so far as to highlight a book that calls him a "criminal."  Which turned to:
Oh look how great the Nabonidus Chronicle is; it proves that Cyrus overtook him in his 17th year. Which turned to: 
Oh wait, let's stop mentioning the Nabonidus Chronicle; turns out that the number 17 was added by expert secular authorities, and that the same chronicle links him directly to the full length of Neriglissar's reign, which is the one tiny window of vulnerability we still need to raise suspicion about a possible 20 year gap!! Which turned to:
Oh look how great Strm. Cambyses is, it tells us directly that 539 is the only absolute date in ancient history!! Which turned to:
Whoops! Now we have to admit that this only works if we accept the authority of secular experts to correct numerous known mistakes and copyist errors on that same tablet, the astronomical tablets' understanding, and ancient tablet methods for measurements of two eclipses, and the authority of modern experts to date those eclipses taking into account the slowdown of the earth by about 16,000 seconds, and a non-contemporary King's list (like Ptolemy's) that is assumed to be correct, and some secular business contract tablets that help establish the length of the reign of Cyrus and Cambyses, (and which we reject when used elsewhere) and some [hi]stories by much later Greek historians that we don't really trust on most other matters. Which turned to:
Look how great the Olympiad dating system is; if we accept that it has been properly tied to the current BC/AD eras, it appears to tells us that the dates for Cyrus are accurate. Which turns to:
Oh wait! We reject the same Olympiad dating system even from much more recent times when it conflicts with our theory of Artaxerxes which we would like to say is 10 years off.  

The BIG question is …
… is it worth all that effort to prove something happened that really didn’t happen,  in 1914?

…. ah yes ….
…… the “Closed Club”  ….

@BTK59
I believe Pudgy may have lost his composure and is now engaging in a self-debate, quite amusing!

You got me curious, since I honestly had never even skimmed this portion of COJ's book. I noticed a footnote, on the same page you pointed to, about the famous eight-UK-clergymen December 1917 Manifesto, from their "prophets" conference. This manifesto has been referenced in the WTS publications several times.
*** nc pp. 20-21 pars. 36-37 When All Nations Collide, Head On, With God ***
Dr. G. Campbell Morgan, Dr. F. B. Meyer, and six other well-known clergymen of England, issued a Manifesto, which was republished throughout the earth and which declared:
37 “(1) That the present crisis points toward the close of the times of the Gentiles. . . . (5) That all human schemes of reconstruction must be subsidiary to the second coming of our Lord, because all nations will then be subject to His rule. . . .”—Current Opinion, for February 1918.
I had already seen this same referenced Manifesto nearly 10 times in different WTS publications. But I had never realized that these "Gentile Times" were not really about 1914, but more specifically about the events of 1917. I hadn't noticed that the context in the WT about the 2520 years, really had nothing to do with this "Gentile Times" manifesto, because it was really more about the supposed fulfillment of the 1,260 days (years) of Revelation 11, which J.A.Brown had predicted 90 years earlier for 1917. (J.A.Brown never connected the 7 times, or 2,520 years, with the Gentile Times.)
So I looked up the phrase "present crisis points toward the close of the times of the Gentiles" in Google. Mostly it came back with Watchtower Library and jw.org links. And I found a lot of links that showed other religions had used the same Manifesto to show that their prophets were just as good or better (Mormons) and other religions used it to show just how useless and irrelevant those predictions had already become. 
But the most curious use of the manifesto was from Rutherford, who used it as "proof" that the world noticed the "beginning of the end of the world" in the 1920 book "Millions Now Living Will Never Die," page 40.
Rutherford quoted from the Manifesto, and had only good things to say about these particular preachers. He called them honest and faithful and good, as compared to so many other clergymen:

Even then, in 1920, it was rare to hear a good word about another preacher from Rutherford. But did he really think they were good, or did he change his mind about them?
A TALE OF TWO FCC's
[The Federal Communications Commission and the Federal Council of Churches]
Well, I checked another link, this time to the FCC, the Federal Communications Commission, which printed the entire speech of Rutherford in 1926, here, page 339. The speech follows the same logic and context of the 1920 "Millions" book treatment, still pointing out the Zionist fulfillment of prophecy. But this time he points out that "these very distinguished men who signed the manifesto have vehemently spoken against present truth and the Lord's kingdom."
https://www.google.com/books/edition/Federal_Communications_Commission/UAwvAAAAMAAJ


What is his evidence of the signers of the above showing vehement opposition to "present truth" since then? It is that a different group of clergymen, who did NOT sign the above manifesto, had signed on to the proposal for the U.S. to join the League of Nations. So in January 1919, the executive committee of the Federal Council of Churches, had made a "blasphemous" statement in that proposal about the League of Nations, hoping it represented a means to peace in the world:
 
The proposal was drafted by the executive committee of the FCC, and by December 1919 had become a petition to send to the U.S. Senate, where it failed. The proposals even contained wording that might remind you or Rutherford's own words about war. This is found in "Internationalizing the Social Gospel: The Federal Council of Churches and European Protestantism, 1914-1925 Author(s): Ralph L. Pearson"

But, naturally, Rutherford doesn't admit that the Watchtower itself had offered the same optimistic idea about the same League of Nations, following some of the same wording of the FCC:
One month after the statement of the FCC in January 1919, the February 15, 1919 Watchtower spoke in similar terms:
“We cannot but admire the high principles embodied in the proposed League of Nations, formulated undoubtedly by those who have no knowledge of the great plan of God. This fact makes all the more wonderful the ideals which they express. For instance, it has been made plain by President Wilson and the advocates of his ideas that the proposed League of Nations is more than merely a league to enforce peace. They would not have us consider it to exclusively from the standpoint of politics or of military relations. It should be considered as fully from the economic and social points of view. The President’s idea seems to be that the League of Nations which he proposes would stand for world service rather than mere world regulation in the military sense, and that the very smallest of nations shall be participants in its every arrangement. In other words, his idea undoubtedly is that the league shall not be established merely for the purpose of promoting peace by threat or coercion; but that its purpose, when put into operation, will be to make all nations of earth one great family, working together for the common benefit in all the avenues of national life. Truly this is idealistic, and approximates in a small way that which God has foretold that he will bring about after this great time of trouble.” — Watch Tower,  February 15, 1919,  p.51 [Reprints page 6389].

Simple!
ZERO EVIDENCE
The Great Tribulation NEVER happened.
Armageddon NEVER happened.
Out of 8 million JWs, 184 JWs die per day!
God’s Kingdom is a future event.
THE SENSELESS ONE IS YOU!

I believe that you will find it impossible to disprove the accuracy of the events, even under the most extreme circumstances. Your senseless words are often disregarded by others. lol!

Your  arguments are completely out on the farm, going through Booger’s Woods, dragging dead possums on a rope.
They have NOTHING to do with anything I have EVER written.
Or even care about!
EVER!
All the historical references you mention I have absolutely NO PROBLEM WITH … I will stipulate the hard historical facts you present are probably true ….. because …. they do nothing to prove that God’s Kingdom was established on Earth anywhere around 1914, and a war in Heaven that took years and cast about one-third of super powerfull life forms down to the Earth …. a multi-year battle between Jehovah God and Christ, and his Enemy and minions …
… there is ZERO EVIDENCE.
How do I know there is ZERO evidence?
I can get up out of my chair, open the front door, walk to the street and stand on the sidewalk and with my own two eyes look around, and not see any!
1.) No evidence of a “Great Tribulation”.
2.) No evidence of Armageddon.
3.) No evidence that Jesus, after fighting a war where at least SOME galaxies would blow up …. or SOMETHING!….. now rules the Earth!
None whatsoever!
Why should I care one iota WHEN Jerusalem was destroyed?  
I don’t.
EVERYONE who has cared has so far been wrong about its importance!  
Everybody who has ever lived.
No exceptions!
I can look out my window and SEE THAT!
”Still waiting how astronomy is the link to all history and the word of God isn't.”
Hold your breath until you turn purple and fall over unconscious.
I never said it was, and I never said the Word of God wasn’t.
I do know what two system temporal benchmarks are, and you apparently don’t.

…. ah yes ….
…… the “Closed Club”  ….

A greater den of scum and villainy has never been than in the closed club. I do my best to keep them in line, because someone has to do it—I owe it to the old hen—but let me tell you, it’s exhausting.

As an aside, note that the entire relative timeline from the beginning of  Neo-Babylonian to the Persian empire can easily be figured out without any reference to astronomy or even BCE dates.
The whole reason the WTS makes such a big deal out of our "traditional" date for the destruction of Jerusalem is based on a relative chronology from 539, not an absolute chronology of the time period. So a relative chronology is all one needs to debunk it. You don't even need to know if 539 was correct or not. You don't need BCE dates at all. Just the widely available archaeology without any need for software or assumptions about any potential copyist's errors, eclipses, planetary positions.
The contemporary business documents alone are more than enough to debunk the WTS chronology. And there are tens of thousands of those stone "witnesses" all consistently pointing to the same timeline. That's why the great emphasis in the WTS publications to constantly sow seeds of doubt about those tablets. I think that, as a group, the WTS is the biggest opposer of the tablets -- and the biggest opposer of ALL Neo-Babylonian archaeology.
 

The upshot of all this so far feels a little bit like a carnival side-show "cover the spot" game only worse.
You have to get the cuneiform translations correct (some argue about the translations)
You have to argue for the cuneiform documents not being altered (some argue they've been altered)
You have to download multiple pieces of software and plot and print each one so you can scrutinize them. (make sure they all have the same resolution and viewpoint)
You have to remember that weird carry the one math thing (or is it minus the one) for BCE dates when you put it into the software.
You have to assume that the software is computing all this correctly, so you'll want to get a chart of eclipses and spot check the software using eclipses in modern times and locations.
You have to assume these have correctly created the right constellations using Babylonian/Assyrian names.
Then you have to research and see if there's evidence that the intercalary months which got added, got added when and where the authorities say they got added. (not all agree)

Or you can just quote your favorite authority and go with that.

In Land Surveying it works the same way in spatial location as in temporal location.
You have to have solid data in both systems to fit “System A” to “System B”, and only then can you translate and rotate so there are no gaps or overlap.
Without a solid “benchmark” in BOTH systems, your data will not match.

In Land Surveying it works the same way in spatial location as in temporal location.
You have to have solid data in both systems to fit “System A” to “System B”, and only then can you translate and rotate so there are no gaps or overlap.
Without a solid “benchmark” in BOTH systems, your data will not match.

Before my time, they sold literature for money or exchanged it for some material goods (eg eggs or similar). Later we said that this "voluntere preaching work" was supported by voluntary contributions and that the tenant could give some money of his choice. Later it was stopped because it is money that was not declared as income and taxed.
Apropos the cessation of preaching. I think it's an outdated dogma because new "clarifications" have arrived, about how people being able to turn to God at the last minute and be saved. According to this new explanation, it no longer makes sense to rely on the idea, from the past, of "stopping preaching" and "closing the doors of the contemporary Ark".
George, you have to keep up with the organization! You're behind! lol